Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 168 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Army List: Eldar

 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:09 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Minneapolis
I may be biased because like Irisado I am an old-school Eldar player with a lot of turretless models in my forces, but it seems to me that the lack of turrets and PD is well compensated for by all the Eldar vehicles being skimmers (thus difficult to pin and able to execute pop-ups). There is no need to upgrade them, and doing so would necessitate a comprehensive recosting relative to similar non-skimmer units.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:38 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:50 pm
Posts: 1476
Iterator wrote:
I may be biased because like Irisado I am an old-school Eldar player with a lot of turretless models in my forces, but it seems to me that the lack of turrets and PD is well compensated for by all the Eldar vehicles being skimmers (thus difficult to pin and able to execute pop-ups). There is no need to upgrade them, and doing so would necessitate a comprehensive recosting relative to similar non-skimmer units.


Agreed. While I don't often play Eldar, I do have a lot of Eldar models, and I've found them to be maneuverable enough as it is. The whole point of Eldar is fast Skimmers that can maneuver as needed. Adding "Turret" would negate the need for such maneuverability, and thus would quash a lot of their flavor.

On the other hand, I can see the point that "the newer models all have turrets, so thus the stats should". There is some logic in this. Perhaps, as was suggested above, we need two lists of stats/points. One list for the "old school" models, and another for the newer ones. Actually, having two lists could be a good thing, as we could then say "Craftworld A favors this list while Craftworld B favors the other".

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:05 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:16 am
Posts: 1003
Irisado wrote:
Considering I still play with all the old models, I'm far more inclined to stick with the current rules for Eldar vehicles like the Falcon. Of course, those who use the new models are likely to see things differently, but when in doubt, I think that it's better to go with the original models for rules decisions like this.

Regarding PD, I agree with Scream. Very few Eldar vehicles/super heavy tanks have that defence. The Tempest, of course, does. Smaller vehicles do not, and should not, in my opinion.


If we are going to stick with old rules, then the images in the army books should reflect them. Trying to entice new players into the game, who are massively knowledgeable 40k players and explaining to them that their vehicle isn't actually anything like what what it should be isn't going to enamour them. "What do you mean my falcon has a single forward firing las-cannon? Eldar don't use las-cannons! They are armed Star cannons, shuriken cannons and twin linked shuriken catapults!! This game sucks ... "

Just because the vehicles didn't have PD back then, doesn't mean they shouldn't. It is a legacy issue.

I guess we come to that fork in the road again were some players are happy to play with the game from 20 years ago and others want to see it brought forward into the modern era.

Matt


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:11 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27034
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Mattman wrote:
Irisado wrote:
Considering I still play with all the old models, I'm far more inclined to stick with the current rules for Eldar vehicles like the Falcon. Of course, those who use the new models are likely to see things differently, but when in doubt, I think that it's better to go with the original models for rules decisions like this.

Regarding PD, I agree with Scream. Very few Eldar vehicles/super heavy tanks have that defence. The Tempest, of course, does. Smaller vehicles do not, and should not, in my opinion.


If we are going to stick with old rules, then the images in the army books should reflect them. Trying to entice new players into the game, who are massively knowledgeable 40k players and explaining to them that their vehicle isn't actually anything like what what it should be isn't going to enamour them. "What do you mean my falcon has a single forward firing las-cannon? Eldar don't use las-cannons! They are armed Star cannons, shuriken cannons and twin linked shuriken catapults!! This game sucks ... "

Just because the vehicles didn't have PD back then, doesn't mean they shouldn't. It is a legacy issue.

I guess we come to that fork in the road again were some players are happy to play with the game from 20 years ago and others want to see it brought forward into the modern era.

Matt


Hi!

Like I said before. If you don't want changes. Use Net Epic Gold. For Platinum/Titanium version it will be updated in keeping with modern 40k lore and names.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 936
Location: Nottingham, UK
Iterator wrote:
I may be biased because like Irisado I am an old-school Eldar player with a lot of turretless models in my forces, but it seems to me that the lack of turrets and PD is well compensated for by all the Eldar vehicles being skimmers (thus difficult to pin and able to execute pop-ups). There is no need to upgrade them, and doing so would necessitate a comprehensive recosting relative to similar non-skimmer units.


Agreed.

Also, Falcons, in particular, work so very well on the flanks that I would be very concerned about giving them a turret style fire arc. They are a very different beast from their EA cousins, and the combination of a 75cm range, turret fire arc, pop-up attacks, and mobility would be too effective for what is, to all intents and purposes a transport gunboat.

Mattman wrote:
If we are going to stick with old rules, then the images in the army books should reflect them. Trying to entice new players into the game, who are massively knowledgeable 40k players and explaining to them that their vehicle isn't actually anything like what what it should be isn't going to enamour them. "What do you mean my falcon has a single forward firing las-cannon? Eldar don't use las-cannons! They are armed Star cannons, shuriken cannons and twin linked shuriken catapults!! This game sucks ... "

Just because the vehicles didn't have PD back then, doesn't mean they shouldn't. It is a legacy issue.

I guess we come to that fork in the road again were some players are happy to play with the game from 20 years ago and others want to see it brought forward into the modern era.

Matt


If image and weapon descriptions is a problem, then we can simply change/update these. The images, I'm not overly concerned about, but if you want weapons to be renamed, then there's no issue with that, since it's largely cosmetic. Brightlance is already in existence under light artillery, so Lascannon could easily be replaced with Brightlance for all Eldar units.

It's not a legacy issue, it's a balance issue. Remember that in 40K Falcons and other Eldar vehicles are pretty powerful. In Epic, they're middle ranking units at best. They thus shouldn't receive a lot of additional defences. They're not supposed to be that great at protecting themselves against infantry.

Also, we need to be, in my view, very cautious about adding more and more weapons to vehicles. We do not want to bog the game down with excessive dice rolling, and too many weapons on basic vehicles adds extra time to the game that isn't needed in my opinion.

Edit: Note too that the Peregrine is basically what you want the Falcon to be, so if the Falcon were changed as per your suggestion, the Peregrine would have to go, since it would lose its role.

_________________
Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:16 am
Posts: 1003
The peregrine is an odd fish, it is completely home made for epic as far as I can tell, it doesn't appear in any 40k lore and it is strange that it has the stats that would be more at home on the modern falcon. Why it has a turret when the model doesn't?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:31 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27034
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Mattman wrote:
The peregrine is an odd fish, it is completely home made for epic as far as I can tell, it doesn't appear in any 40k lore and it is strange that it has the stats that would be more at home on the modern falcon. Why it has a turret when the model doesn't?


Hi!

I'm thinking for the "platinum version" delete all of these home brew ones. Keep it 40k lore friendly.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 1:40 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Minneapolis
Bear in mind that 40k is balanced (to the extent that it even IS balanced) for a squad/platoon level game, where single armor units are really powerful.

Adapting unit capabilities directly from 40k to Epic will not work well.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 12:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:48 pm
Posts: 13
Now that I started preparing to setup a battle using NetEpic rules, I compared the Eldar Phantom titan damage table from the old Space Marine 2nd book : 'Renegades' with the titan damage table sheets in the NetEPIC Gold pdf files.

The damage table descriptions in the Renegades book is a bit more spectacular than the short notes in the NetEPIC Gold Army book for Eldar.
E.g. in the Renegades Phantom Titan damage table it says: " ... and the titan is vapourised in a spectacular meltdown. The titan is removed from play .."
In the NetEPIC Gold Rules is just says: "Reactor explodes! Titan is removed from play ...".

The end result is of course the same. 3D6 damage and no more Eldar titan. But I think it does add some colour to the game to have descriptions of how the titans are destroyed.

I understand that it is limited how much description there is room for in the damage tables in the NetEPIC pdf files, and that someone besides from myself has to type this in.
But if you are considering revising the NetEPIC Gold rules at some stage, it could perhaps be worth considering adding a bit more to the descriptions in the damage tables.

This is not to criticize you people who have sat down and prepared the NetEPIC rules, you have all of my respect for doing this enormous task.
In the end, I am happy to have both set of rules nearby (i.e. the Renegades book and the NetEpic Eldar Army book) if I need to add more to the story of the battle I got going on.

Anyway, this was just food for thought.
:)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:41 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27034
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
HAL9000 wrote:
Now that I started preparing to setup a battle using NetEpic rules, I compared the Eldar Phantom titan damage table from the old Space Marine 2nd book : 'Renegades' with the titan damage table sheets in the NetEPIC Gold pdf files.

The damage table descriptions in the Renegades book is a bit more spectacular than the short notes in the NetEPIC Gold Army book for Eldar.
E.g. in the Renegades Phantom Titan damage table it says: " ... and the titan is vapourised in a spectacular meltdown. The titan is removed from play .."
In the NetEPIC Gold Rules is just says: "Reactor explodes! Titan is removed from play ...".

The end result is of course the same. 3D6 damage and no more Eldar titan. But I think it does add some colour to the game to have descriptions of how the titans are destroyed.

I understand that it is limited how much description there is room for in the damage tables in the NetEPIC pdf files, and that someone besides from myself has to type this in.
But if you are considering revising the NetEPIC Gold rules at some stage, it could perhaps be worth considering adding a bit more to the descriptions in the damage tables.

This is not to criticize you people who have sat down and prepared the NetEPIC rules, you have all of my respect for doing this enormous task.
In the end, I am happy to have both set of rules nearby (i.e. the Renegades book and the NetEpic Eldar Army book) if I need to add more to the story of the battle I got going on.

Anyway, this was just food for thought.
:)


Hi!

No worries Hal9000. :)

The reason for changing them is simply GW IP lawyers. You cannot simply "copy/paste" the old stuff and avoid trouble with them.

Net epic has been reviewed by GW many, many times over the last 17 years. The reasons we don't draw any heat is that we redid the rules in our own words, we don't use their images and we use the appropriate disclaimers.

With all that said, I agree I enjoy that old colorful descriptions, but it was decided early on to keep the game language simple.

I could easily reinsert my own descriptions, but that may or may not be favored. I happen to belong to the school of thought that rulebooks should be entertaining to read as well as informative. But that's a very "old school" way of thinking nowadays.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:34 pm
Posts: 3111
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
The descriptions on the Excel spreadsheets I did up were even more brief I'm afraid, but this was out of concern that the text wouldn't fit. Anyone versed in the ways of excel is welcome to contact me if they want the Excel* versions of the damage sheets to play around with and insert any text they wish.

You can contact me at: thebissler@gmail.com

Cheers!


*I continue to have issues posting Excel docs to the forum.

_________________
Proud to be described by CyberShadow as Tactical Command's "...biggest threat in recent times..."!

Clickable links for Epic hijinks:
Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 2:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:48 pm
Posts: 13
Oh. I see.

I agree with you. It is better to keep the wording in the damage tables (and everything else) different from the GW wording. I didn't realize this, but it makes sense.

Thanks for offering the excel spreadsheets. I got around it yesterday, by cross referencing between NetEpic and my old 2nd ed. rulebooks.
:)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:35 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:47 am
Posts: 3065
Location: Brisbane, Australia
So, has anyone developed and play-tested rules for the Hornet and Lynx yet? Using V5.0 as a basis, perhaps (and these are a bit out there based on FW fluff):

Hornet:

30cm 5+ +0 Pulse Lasers 75cm 1 4+ -1 Skimmer, Special - Pulse Laser causes D3 hits on a successful attack roll.

3 for 150 or 6 for 250?

Lynx (Tremor Cannon version):

25cm 1+ +1 Tremor Cannon [As per Titan weapon of same name] Skimmer, Special - unable to make pop up attacks
Shuriken Cannon 50cm 1 5+ 0
1 for 200

Lynx (Pulsar version)

25cm 1+ +1 Pulsar [As per Titan weapon of same name] Skimmer, Special - See Pulsar notes
Shuriken Cannon 50cm 1 5+ 0

1 for 250


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:11 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:18 pm
Posts: 1618
Location: France
Hi Zap,

I think the profiles you proposed are a bit too powerfull.

I'd see:
Hornet:
30cm 5+ +0 Pulse Lasers 75cm 2 4+ -1 Skimmer
3 for 200 points

For the Lynx, I suppose that it's a superheavy according to its size ?

Lynx does not come with a Tremor version, but it can be fielded with a pulsar or a sonic lance. FW does not have the equivalence to the Scorpion/Revenant titan pulse laser weapon and thy always call it "pulsar".

Lynx with Pulsar may use a single pulse laser (not on a turret) and would cost less than a scorpion that has 2 pulse lasers.

Maybe:
Lynx (Pulsar version)
25cm 1+ +1 Pulse Laser [As per Titan weapon of same name] Skimmer, Special, Superheavy - See Pulsar Laser notes
Shuriken Cannon 50cm 1 5+ 0
1 for 200 or 1 for 175 ?

For the Sonic Lance variant, I don't reallly know wich profil to use/create but sonic lance is not a tremor cannon IMHO.
-> There's a Sonic Cannon on the Phoenix Bomber, not sure it does the same thing than a Sonic Lance
According to weapon description, it uses a teardrop template and place it up to 18" from weapon. This kind of weapon remind me the weapon on Ordinatus Mars, maybe we could use this kind of weapon, set the to-hit roll to 3+ and set the range to 75cm ?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Army List: Eldar
PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27034
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

one point of the platinum version is to get stats for all the newer 40k type vehicles. Given the amount of proxies/conversions out there we should strive to get out as many stats for vehicles as we can. :)

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 168 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net